Suchergebnisse

Neo-Marxists do not pretend to be value-free and that their work has a definite political message and objective. They contend that mainstream social scientists, in their study of development in the Third World, have unwittingly served the foreign policy interests of the developed countries. Neo-Marxists tend to be deductivists, in which their research is guided by a set of rules that define and give meaning to reality. Objectivity in this sense is understood to mean affirming the elementary rules of empirical research to fulfill better their commitment to the proletariat. Neo-Marxists assume that the world is one integrated whole. It follows from this that development of one part cannot be looked at in isolation from the underdevelopment of another, and that domination does not occur in a vacuum, but rather, it is a part of a process in which both the victim and the victimizer interact based on their relative access--or lack thereof-- to certain values resources, e.g. surplus labor, that are essential to the maintenance of an international division of labor. Neo-Marxists affirm the significance of material--as opposed to purely economic--factors in explaining development. And finally, on the revolutionary approach to socialism, neo-Marxists are much more open-minded that their classical counterparts in they do not regard it as an absolute and inevitable course.

The purveyors of social knowledge, including the social sciences, in the Philippines from the Spanish colonial period to the present have borne much responsibility in the task of delineating what is considered as dangerous & subversive, on one hand, & permissible, on the other. More importantly, they have served, either willingly or unwillingly, to legitimize & validate the existing political order by elaborating on that order's ideological basis, contributing to the formulation & implementation of policies, refusing to challenge the political order, or simply being acquiescent to its presence. The Philippine experience reinforces the observation that objectivity is relative to the paradigm to which the practitioner belongs. In the wake of the postbehavioral movement in the social sciences, the social scientist's role in the Philippines, like that of his or her counterparts in the West, is influenced not so much by the drive to be objective as by the need to choose between competing values that would ultimately determine his or her relevance to society.

Critical of the US-initiated program as infringing on the country's sovereignty and unsuitable for sustained and equitable development. Some emphasis on the implicit obligation to renew the lease for the US military base.